Patna High Court
Mukhtar DhangadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Mukhtar Dhangad, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 15 litres of liquor from his residence. He contended that he has a clean antecedent, that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and that the house is a joint‑family property, making it uncertain whether he knew of the liquor. He further argued that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and a condition that the trial court verify his antecedent within six weeks. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be cancelled, otherwise it would be confirmed, and the petitioner undertook to deposit Rs.1,500 with the Advocates’ Association.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act eliminates the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender.
- Whether possession can be imputed to a petitioner in a joint‑family house where the liquor was recovered.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6616 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2026 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Mukhtar Dhangad S/o Late Shankar Dhangad Resident of - Amwaman
Dhangad Toli, Ward No. 7, P.S - Majhuliya, District - West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gyan Prakash
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Syed Mojibur Rahman
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 15 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and after 2018
amendment in the Excise Act, the concept of deemed possession
and presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
submitted that the house in question is a joint family property as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6616 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner
who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the
house was within knowledge of the petitioner. It is next
submitted that he came to be implicated at the instance of
Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Majhauliya P.S. Case No. 19 of 2026, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case
then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6616 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner
based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to deposit
an amount of Rs. 1,500/- with Advocates’ Association, Patna High
Court within a period of two weeks from today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…